Recent Comments
RSS feed
Eco-Tax Rally: Saturday, 18th of September 2010
September 13, 2010 — xanthippaWhere: Jim Watson’s campaign office, 1355 Richmond Rd.
Time: 12 noon
Date: 18th of September, 2010
Here is the email from Debbie Jodoin, one of the protest organizers, announcing the rally:
“Are you tired of Premier Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberals taking money out of your pockets?
Maybe you are tired of Dalton and the Ontario Liberals playing hide and sneak with your tax dollars?
Or, maybe you are just tired of Dalton and all his broken promises.
Come out at 12:00 pm, Saturday, Sept 18th to Jim Watson’s Campaign office . 1355 Richmond Road.Let’s ask Mr Watson about his 6 and half years as a Cabinet Minister under Dalton McGuinty.
He has to be held accountable for our high provinical taxes.
Bring your signs, bring your water, bring your chairs and show Dalton he can no longer take advantage of us.
With your HELP, ONTARIO CAN LEAD AGAIN!!!”
Was the ‘Koran-burning preacher’ Terry Jones duped by the moderate imam Musri?
September 9, 2010 — xanthippaWhile checking out TheReligionOfPeace, I came across this story.
Instead of trying to simply retell what the article says, let me try to re-construct some plausible approximation of how it might possibly had happened.
First, we have the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’. And, yes – the undercarriage of one of the airplanes that hit ‘The Towers’ on 11/09/2001 actually fell on top of this building and damaged it: this makes the building ‘Ground Zero‘. Imam Rauf, who is building the Ground Zero Mosque cannot, by any reasonable person, be called ‘moderate’ – not with what has been learned about him… and certainly not based on his behaviour.
Anyhow…
Yesterday (Wednesday), imam Rauf is quoted in the linked article as saying that
‘nothing is off the table’ when asked whether he would consider moving the site.
Today, (Thursday), Donald Trump is reported to have offered that he would buy the building from imam Rauf for 25% more than it had cost him: not because he wants the building, but because he would like to end the controversy amicably. Considering that imam Rauf and his gang had paid $4.8 million for the damaged building, Mr. Trump is truly putting his money where his mouth is.
So far so good.
But things go from good to bad rather fast.
A nutty and, by the sounds of it, somewhat unpopular preacher Terry Jones from Florida got annoyed by something and declared September 11th, 2010, to be ‘International Burn-the-Koran Day’. (No, not a ‘Burn-an-imam Day’ – just destroying some inanimate objects he owns.)
Could it have been the very existence of the Mosque at Ground Zero? Or, perhaps the speed with which it’s breezing through all the building permits while St. Nicholas Orthodox Church, the tiny little churched destroyed as the South Tower collapsed on top of it, appears to be fatally entangled in the red tape which denies its reconstruction? Or was it hearing about the hundreds of bibles burned by Iran?
Perhaps he was expressing solidarity with the Muslims in Iran who have posted this video of themselves, burning the Koran, as a symbol of protest against the oppressive theocracy which is ruining their country? (Thanks, BCF, for digging this one up.)
Perhaps it was a little bit or everything.
Perhaps he was simply exercising his freedom of religion!
Whatever the cause, the fact remains that preacher Jones is well within his rights to destroy his own property, however he chooses to, and nobody has the right to meddle!
Of course, meddle they did.
And this is where it gets rather ugly…
‘Everyone’ has been meddling!
It was just ugly when it was just the usual media lackeys who condemned him.
It was emotional blackmail and just idiotic when people ‘all over’ tried to make him somehow responsible for the potential actions of other people. Yet, that is exactly what happened!
But when General Petraeus, the American Troops top commander in Afghanistan, came out and started telling anyone who’d listen that how a specific citizen of the USA chooses to exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed rights, he’ll be guilty of putting American troops into danger – that is when it gets downright scary!
Since when do we live in a society which permits military generals to dictate who gets to exercise their Constitutional rights, and how? Do we even WANT to live in such a society?
Of course, the media ignored the constitutional rights issue and instead of demanding that General Petraeus be stripped of his position and dishonourably discharged from the military (the minimum reasonable reaction to a general caught bullying civilians out of their civil rights) , they have given the military man a pass and continued to beat up on the nutty preacher. Sad, even if predictable.
Of course, this is not where it ended.
US President Obama – the guy who found nothing offensive in decades of reverend Jeremiah Wright‘s ‘God Damn America’ sermons – condemned his own citizen for exercising his freedom of religion. In this abc piece, Obama is quoted as saying (regarding Terry Jones’s plan to exercise his freedom of religion):
“If he’s listening, I just hope he understands that what he’s proposing to do is completely contrary to our values … this country has been built on the notions of religious freedom and religious tolerance,”
In other words, Obama says that the USofA ‘has been built on the NOTIONS(?!?) of religious freedom’, but believes that exercising them is ‘completely contrary’ to American values. (I am presuming here that when Obama says ‘ours’, he actually DOES mean ‘American’.)
Does Obama really not realize what is coming out of his mouth?!?!?
Last night, the internet provider pulled the plug on the prea
Today, when Secretary of Defense Gates did not only not fire Petraeus, but actually personally phoned Jones up and parroted Obama and the disgraceful general, preacher Jones began to show cracks.
So, let me recap.
So far, we have tons of pressure on preacher Jones to cancel his ‘Burn-a-Koran Day’ day, which he is ostensibly holding as an exercise of his freedom of religion, because he is so annoyed with imam Rauf’s arrogant project which has created so much discord in the American psyche.
We also have imam Rauf claiming ‘nothing is off the table’ when he was asked if he would be willing to move the mosque’s location to a less controversial spot.
Donald Trump takes imam Rauf seriously and offers to buy out the ‘Park 51’ property from him while giving imam Rauf a 25% return on his investment.
In comes the ‘moderate’ imam Musri,reportedly an influential Muslim from Florida.
Preacher Jones meets with imam Musri and comes out of the meeting convinced (rightly or wrongly) that since the Ground Zero Mosque builders have agreed to move their project, he is calling off the ‘Burn-the-Koran Day’!
Yes, he has called the ‘Burn-the-Koran Day’ off!
But, he has done so in the honest belief that the reason for his decision to so publicly exercise his freedom of religion by burning the Koran was no longer there – that the thorn has been removed from his side!
Once the ‘Burn-a-Koran Day’ was called off, the ‘moderate’ imam Musri says that there must have been a misunderstanding: he only promised that the two of them (Musri and Jones) would travel to New York to seek an audience with imam Rauf in order to ask him to, please, be so kind as to consider, may be, perhaps, moving his project elsewhere.
If he’d like to.
Pretty please.
Gee – how could such a misunderstanding have come about?!?!?
On a completely unrelated note – have you ever heard of the Islamic concept of ‘taqiyya’?
A letter from Afghanistan to Dalton McGuinty’s EA
September 9, 2010 — xanthippaFirst of all, I would like to thank this soldier – both for what he is doing for all of us in Afghanistan, putting himself in danger tto keep us and our kids are safe, and for taking time to write to Dalton McGuinty’s EA and asking for an explanation of how ‘freedom of speech and assembly’ became ‘privileges’.
Now, to explain…
There has been a series of recent protests against Dalton McGuinty, the Premier of Ontario, organized by two Ottawa taxpayers, Debbie Jodoin and Shirley Mosley. Ms. Jodoin is so upset with Mr. McGuinty’s policies, she has decided to seek a nomination for the Conservative Party to run against Mr. McGuinty, in his riding, during next year’s Provincial election.
The protests have attracted some attention – and Mr. McGuinty’s ‘office’ began subtle intimidation tactics against the demonstration organizers, especially Ms. Jodoin. This culminated in a letter Mr. McGuinty’s Exacutive Assistant, John Fraser, had written and emailed to Ms. Jodoin.
Not only did Mr. Fraser see fit to email it to Ms. Jodoin at work, he also emailed it to each and every one of her co-workers – and her boss. In the email, Mr. Fraser admonishes Ms. Jodoin not to forget to obey the laws…. Yeah, employer’s just LOVE to get emails addressed to their employees which imply that without a ‘friendly reminder’ from the office of the Premier, this employee could not be counted on to obey the law of the land!
If the intimidation were not enough, Mr. Fraser’s letter (officially sent as coming from the Premier’s office) also included the following phrase:
“I think we can agree that free speech and the right to assemble are both a privilege and a cornerstone of our democracy.”
With Ms. Jodoin’s permission, I posted the full letter, along with the context (Mr. Fraser thought it necessary to come up to Ms. Jodoin just prior to the demonstration and ensure she agrees to follow the laws – the Ottawa Police were there in force, and even brought along a paddy-vagon…you know, just in case!)
Well, a few other blogs picked up on this, thanks to a great deal to MooseAnd Squirrel, BlazingCatfur and all the rest of the bloggers who picked up the story. The story made it around the world. Yesterday, BlazingCatfur posted a letter which a soldier, serving in Afghanistan as a member of Canadian Armed Forces, had sent to Mr. Fraser in response to the Jodoin letter.
He writes:
“One can not even imagine the sheer delight, as I try in many ways to convey to my troops that free speech and the right to assemble are a privilege.”
Read the full letter here.
And, if I ever have the honour to shake this person’s hand, the beverages will be on me!
Photos from August 28th at Dalton McGuinty’s constituency office – part 2
August 31, 2010 — xanthippaThe August 28th protest in front of Premier Dalton McGuinty’s office drew quite a crowd – as well as relatively heavy police presence.
At the first protest, held July 17th (photos here), there were 2 squad cars, with 2 cops each.
At the second protest, which was not held at Dalton’s McGuinty’s constituency office but at Bob Chiarelli’s (he is the Ontario Government’s Minister of Communications), there was no visible police presence at all. (Photos/write-up are here and here.)
At this third protest, the police were highly visible. Like at the first one, there were 2 squad cars with 2 officers each. However, in addition to these, there was also a paddy-wagon – just in case any protesters did not obey the rules and regulations….
Perhaps the presence of the paddy-wagon was anticipated, because this crowd is so very disruptive and destructive…. Leaving the last protest, I actually saw one of the protesters stop and pick up pieces of trash (an old pop-can, I think) which he saw on the ground on his way back to his car – oh, yes, these people are a menace to a neighbourhood!
Suzanne, from BigBlueWave, was at the protest and kindly sent me a link to the video she took of Debbie Jodoin speaking about the intimidation:
Permit me to put this into context:
Imagine that the Prime Minster’s Executive Assistant took it upon himself to send an email to your work – yourself, your co-workers and your employer(!), directed to you, advising you to remember the parking bylaws on your street…and even admonishing you to to ‘be mindful of your neighbours and their inconvenience, if you park in a way that might inconvenience them!
Then, that same Exacutive Assistant from the Prime Minister’s office went door-to-door, talking to your neighbours, asking them if you and your parking habits are inconveniencing them.
And to top it off, when you got home, imagine that there were a couple of cops – with a paddy-wagon ready to drag you off in, watching all your moves, where you parked, how you parked, how long you parked for….
Would that not be intimidating?
Well, Dalton McGuinty and his EA have about as much jurisdiction over this protest as the Prime Minister and his EA have over parking bylaws: neither the leader of the Provincial Government nor the leader of the Federal Government have any jurisdiction over municipal bylaws!
They are not responsible for them to be enforced – and it is certainly not their place to ‘remind’ law-abiding citizens to be good little slaves and obey them!
If the above comparison does not demonstrate just how intimidating this action is, think about it in these terms:
WHEN is it not intimidating for a political leader (or his EA, with the official ‘from the office of’ thingy) to send your employer an email in which he admonishes you not to break the law?
And that does not even address the content of the letter…which demands that we all agree that our unalienable right to free speech is a ‘privilege’!
But, I have already ranted on that…
One more thing: the ‘request’ from ‘above’ was that we do not go on the road (duh!), or the lane in front of the mall, or any of the sidewalks – because that would ‘block traffic’ and interfere with the businesses livelihood. In other words, we were to stand on the ‘lawn’.
Do you know what the ‘lawn’ at Dalton McGuinty’s office is composed of?
100% RAGWEED!
He bloody told us to go stand in ragweed! (I still have the blisters on my feet to prove it – oh, and this picture of the ‘lawn’.)
Because, this is how much the businesses were ‘blocked’ and ‘inconvenienced’ by the protesters:
I actually went into that little corner store to buy a bottle of water – it was hot! The lady at the cash did not bother to get off the phone while serving me….and made it a point NOT to meet my eyes. I am an Aspie – and rather aware of these things (as they are not ‘natural’ to me and I do not want to give offense – so I try WAY harder at them than most people – she had to work very hard indeed to avoid meeting my eyes). But, she made up for it in rude brusqueness, tossing my change onto the counter contemptuously and turning her back to me.
If this is how they treat their paying customers, no wonder this business is not seeing much traffic.
At least the water was nice!
As you see – people tried their best not to stand on the pavement.
Shirley Mosley
Nick Vandergragt spoke well and pationately:
He pointed out how wonderful and tolerant a country we live in – even though this is a protest against Premier McGuinty and his policies, the young man sent from his office to monitor and record us was given the best, front-row spot and could record unmolested: and so it SHOULD be!
That is what our veterans like Bert fought for!
But, Mr. Vandergragt had a very important point: the problem with the McGuinty Government (or, as some people call it, the McGuilty Gang) and their ilk is not just the individual scandals – it is their whole mindset t hat is deeply flawed! And, put into practice, their ideas are destructive beyond imagination!
I concur.
Perhaps you would like to ear the words of Bert, a 94-year-old veteran who tells it like it is (as recorded by VideoManOttawa):
The cops remained vigilant:
But the firefighters driving by gave us a thumbs up! (I do not use the term ‘firefighter’ because I am politically correct, but because to me ‘fireman’ will always be someone who burns books – blame Ray Bradbury!)
VideoManOttawa was there with his trusty video camera and he has posted the videos on YouTube. They are here, here, here, here, here,here, here,also here and here (including speeches by the municipal election candidates), here (Nick Vandergragt), here,here, and here.
.
Dalton McGuinty’s EA attempts to intimidate Debbie Jodoin
August 29, 2010 — xanthippaSaturday, August 28th 2010, there was a rally in front of Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty’s constituency office in Ottawa to protest the crushing tax burden, the illegal eco-taxes (which the McGuinty’s Liberals have partially pulled and are re-thinking, finding another way to impose them which could not be as blatantly unconstitutional). The pictures from this protest are here and here (coming).
This is the third protest in the series organized by Debbie Jodoin and Shirley Mosely – two feisty ladies who are simply fed up with the contempt with which the Ontario government is treating us, Ontarians. In fact, Debbie Jodoin is so fed up, she has decided to seek the nomination by the Conservative Party of Ontario to run against Premier Dalton McGuinty ( in his riding) during the next Provincial election!
Debbie and Shirley have taken out all the proper permits for each and every one of the three demonstrations (and I expect the pattern to follow for the next protest, which will be held at Jim Watson’s office on September 18th, 12 noon to 2 p.m.). There was no problem at either of the first two protest rallies – with the police (who had a presence at the first protest, 2 squad cars with 2 cops each – watching and making sure we did not block traffic or break any other rules, but who were absolutely invisible at the second protest – the one where an MPP and the media cameras were present) or with the businesses.
At this third protest rally, there was a police presence. Not only were there 2 squad cars (with two cops apiece), there was also a police paddy-wagon!
I suppose all of us regular citizens protesting the illegal taxation the McGuinty Liberals are imposing on us are likely to be in need of being dragged off by the police!
But, that is not all.
Debbie Jodoin – and each and every one of her co-workers, including her employer – received an intimidating letter in the vein of the A. Houle letter to Ann Coulter before her speech at Ottawa University!
In a private email to me, Debbie Jodoin has described (she was in a rush – she is going out of town on a business trip) the concerns leading up to the protest:
“It was Dalton EA that sent the email message . Point is we had our first ECO TAX rally there a few weeks back with 500 people and the police and businesses there had no complaints . Point is we always get a city permit and they have the instructions on it and I will send it to you via email as well.
One business even let us use his washroom! I took it upon myself to phone this gentleman and thank him and once again ask for use of his washroom and perhaps give him 25 dollars for some electricity to run our sound systemThe gentleman had no problem that I believe was on a Tuesday with the call coming from my workplace on my lunch hour.
On Friday morning this business owner phoned my work and told the staff that we could use his washrooms but could not use any power as he did not want to get involved in this.In this ! one now asks why would he say that, until I recieved the email that was sent to me and all my co-workers at our place or work to give me instructions on how to behave there etc through his email.
So now the scenario fits ..Mr Fraser the EA took it upon himself to speak to all these businesses or I should assume he did to ask them how concerned they were about another rally gearing up outside their business and stirred the pot . This is typical of Dalton and the gang.
Brendan McGuinty was not there …the first Rally DAVID McGuinty sat in his car and watched the rally ..then they had David Suzki write and article on how wrong we are to fight the ECO TAX.. 2nd rally at Chiarelli’s office we had a call the friday before from a MP ;s office in the same bldg of Chiarellies that was being called and asked us to show respect to the businesses in the mall and not to block there business.And then whamo we get this phone call and email from McGunity’s office.”
So, what was in this email? The email that was sent to Debbie Jodoin, each and every one of her co-workers as well as her employer?
Here is the full wording of the email:
From: Fraser_John <jfraser@liberal.ola.org>
To: Clarke, Rob – M.P.
Cc: Clarke, Rob – Assistant 1; Clarke, Rob – Assistant 2; Clarke, Rob – Assistant 3
Sent: Fri Aug 27 15:12:22 2010
Subject: Attention Debbie Jodoin – My apologies if anyone receives this email in error.Ms. Jodoin ,
It has been brought to my attention that you are organizing a rally/protest outside our constituency office tomorrow. I think we can agree that free speech and the right to assemble are both a privilege and a cornerstone of our democracy. I am sending you this note to ensure you aware of the concerns of our neighbours.As the organizer of the rally/protest I am sure that you have made arrangements to ensure a safe event for everyone involved. I do want to encourage you and the citizens participating in your rally/protest to have respect for our neighbours at the Kilborn Plaza. Our neighbours are small business owners who depend on parking and easy access for their customers, many of whom are seniors.
Out of respect for our neighbours, I would ask that you urge the participants to:
- Avoid using the parking directly in the lane directly in front of the store fronts. There is parking on the side and back of the mall that is easily accessed.
- Understand the mall’s businesses depend on a smooth flow on both the sidewalk and lane directly in front of the stores.
- Ensure that the entrances to the mall are not blocked so the mall’s customers can have easy access to parking.
Thank you in advance for your consideration.John Fraser
Executive Assistant
Office of Dalton McGuinty, MPP
All the rules and conditions that the protesters have to abide by are listed on the City of Ottawa permit, which Debbie had taken out for the protest. Therefore, she is quite familiar with them.
So, why should Dalton McGuinty’s EA take it upon himself to remind her of these?
This is between Ms. Jodoin and the City of Ottawa – who granted her the permit. The Provincial government has absolutely no jurisdiction in this. Yet, Dalton McGuinty’s EA had taken it upon himself to remind Ms. Jodoin (who is about to challenge Mr. McGuinty for his seat) as well as her employer and her co-workers of all this!
Add to this the fact that one of the merchants in the strip mall actually felt intimidated enough to not want to ‘get involved in this’ – and you will begin to get a picture how these crooks work!
Just prior to the protest, this video captures an exchange between Ms. Jodoin and a man whom I presume to be Mr. Fraser:
But, perhaps THE most important phrase in that letter is:
“I think we can agree that free speech and the right to assemble are both a privilege …”
No, Mr. Fraser, we cannot agree that freedom of speech and the right to assemble are both a privilege!
NOT AT ALL!
These are fundamental rights and freedoms, inherent to each human being and so recognized in our Constitution!
Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly ARE NOT PRIVILEGES!
The very fact that you think so – and that you seem to expect that we will agree – shows to us the depth of depravity that the McGuintyLiberal government has sunk to!
Shame on you all!
Photos from August 28th at Dalton McGuinty’s constituency office – part 1
August 28, 2010 — xanthippaShort and sweet – here are the photos.
Debbie Jodoin, one of the two powerhouses behind this protest, had quite an announcement: She is so angry, she will seek the Conservative nomination to run AGAINST Dalton McGuinty in the next provincial election!
There is more: Dalton McGuinty is aware that she is seeking the nomination to run against him in his riding. Perhaps this is unrelated, perhaps not…but, Dalton McGuinty’s EA had sent Ms. Jodoin an email one day before the protest – and to her place of employment, none the less – attempting to intimidate her!
Also, Dalton McGuinty’s lackey clearly stated in the email that ‘freedom of speech’ is a PRIVILEGE she ought not abuse!!! I’ll be making a separate post dedicated to this email, including its full text as soon as I can get it written up.
Shirley Mosley reminded us that three of Dalton McGuinty’s most trusted Ministers are now seeking office in Municipal elections….and that unlike the Ottawa race, Torontonians are not buying ‘Diaper-head’ Slitherman’s bullcrap:
Bart, a WWII veteran who’s coming up to 95 years of age – and who does not like the way the McGuinty Gang are treating Ontario seniors.
Following his speech, Debbie thanked him, all our veterans – and all our members of the Armed Forces. They have always fought for our rights and freedoms – it is about time we backed them up!
Sharon, from CFRA, also had a few thoughts about the McGuinty gang… And, she took the local MPP’s to task for not showing up: this was an abdication of their responsibilities! The crowd agreed with her wholeheartedly!
Nick Vandergragt was an awesome speaker!
He, too thanked all our vets and the brave men and women of our armed forces: he gets it! He truly does! More on his message later…
Even though the provincial politicians did not show up – shame on them all – many of the candidates for Ottawa municipal elections were present.
Even Harper MacKay was there, pressing licking flesh:
There is so much more to come in part 2.
(If you’d like to receive a higher resolution version of any of the photos – or some other photos taken at the protest today, please, comment on it and I’ll be happy to email them to you.)
McGuinty tax protest: 28th of August, 2010
August 26, 2010 — xanthippaWhere: Premier Dalton McGinty’s Ottawa office at 1795 Infanticide Kilborn Ave.
When: Saturday, 28th of August, 2010, 12 noon to 2 pm
17th of July, 2010, several hundred highly disgruntled Ontario taxpayers showed up at Premier Dalton McGuinty’s Ottawa office to show their displeasure (to put it mildly) at the illegal taxes which Premier McGuinty permitted an unelected board made up of industry members to levy directly on the Ontarians.
Two brave and energetic ladies organized this protest: Debbie Jodoin and Shirley Mosley. There were a few print media guys, but the only video was shot by ‘people’, not the media. I took some photos at the protest, posted here and here.
The protest was part of a greater wave of dissatisfaction with Dalton McGuinty’s disrespectful conduct towards the Ontario Taxpayers – and it was successful. Debbie and Shirley lead the vocal Ottawa faction of citizens whose patience with Mr. McGuinty’s antics had run out to another protest on August 7th, this time held in front of another (in my never-humble-opinion) crooked Ottawa politician’s office – Bob Chiarelli, who is currently McGuinty’s Minister of Communications (and, I suspect, the sleaziest, most despicable, most contemptible person in Ottawa – but my reasons for thinking this are secrets which are not mine to reveal, no matter how much I am itching to).
This second protest attracted greater attention: more media coverage (though, most TV cameras showed up early and left before most of the protesters arrived) as well as more politicians showed up, from Lisa McLeod to many candidates for the Ottawa Council. Even a young man who ran out of power (of the battery kind) came all the way from Premier McGuinty’s office to monitor and report.
Also spotted among the protesters were some card-carrying members of the Liberal Party (recognized by some of their neighbours who also attended): it seems that it is not just people who would be unlikely to vote for McGuinty, but also people who make up the core of his voters are getting fed up with McGuinty’s policies of treating Ontarians with contempt.
Curiously, unlike the first protest, the second one had no visible police presence.
Photos from the August 7th protest are here, here and here.
I have also taken the opportunity to muse on the topic – even if only ‘theoretically’. My post wondering if governments have the ‘right’ to collect taxes forcibly (as opposed to voluntary) has sparked perhaps the longest and deepest ‘comment section’ of any of my posts so far. And, I have posted a story about a man who refused to submit himself to serfdom – hoping to illustrate some of the similarities between robota – ‘serfdom’ – and the current system of mandatory taxes, where governments have usurped unto themselves the right to suspend civil liberties when it comes to collecting taxes…
The next demonstration will take place this coming Saturday, August 28th, from noon to 2 pm at Premier McGuinty’s constituency office. Circumstances permitting, I plan to be there. And, I’ll let you know how it went – perhaps even post some photos.
If you are going to be in the Ottawa area this Saturday, I hope to see you there!
‘Regular Tamils’ are returning to Sri Lanka: so, who is aboard the MV Sun Sea?
August 13, 2010 — xanthippaSometimes, one has to wonder at the level of our ‘public debate’.
The latest example is the ship which had entered Canadian waters today, loaded with ‘Tamil political refugees’.
Some claim the boat is chock full of ‘human smugglers’ and Tamil Tigers – a terrorist organization which is best known for (among other things):
- the invention of ‘the suicide belt’
- using women as suicide bombers
- oppressing (even murdering) other Tamils who refused their militant methods and who tried to negotiate peace with the Sri Lankan government
- extorting money from emigrant Tamils to financially supporting the Tigers’ terrorist activity by threatening to harm their relatives still living in Sri Lanka
- ethnically clensing the Singhalese and Muslims in ‘their’ territoty
- being a terrorist organization that is Hindu and not Muslim…
The ‘public debate’ is dominated by the questions of how to separate the ‘legitimate refugees’ from the terrorists hiding among them, how to treat them, what process to apply to them, and so on. This is all done among the warnings that several more ships are ready to set out. Whether they also head for Canada depending on how Canada treats this shipload….because Canada has a reputation as a naive pushover when it comes to aggressive immigrants.
The mainstream media is, rather predictably, not getting to the core of the issues – which pretty much ensures that the public remains ignorant of them, much less that they get discussed.
As it happens…
Until recently, my husband used to work with an excellent engineer who just happens to be a Tamil émigré.
Very intelligent, a competent and skilled engineer, with a six-figure salary.
Her husband also had an excellent job.
When their homeland on Sri Lanka was being torn apart by the ‘conflict’, they left, came to Canada and made a home here for themselves and their kids.
But, the conflict is over.
Done with.
Gone.
No, things are not ‘perfect’. Of course not. 25 years of bitter conflict, with hundreds of thousands of deaths on both sides, take a while to ‘work out’.
But, the time for fighting is over and the time for re-building has begun. And, many ‘regular’ Tamils who had been driven from their homeland are returning and starting the process of rebuilding everything, from the infrastructure and the economy to the social fabric of the country.
According to my hubby’s friend, ‘things’ are now ‘safe’ on Sri Lanka, even for ‘regular Tamils’. Safe enough for these two intelligent and practical people to bring their kids back ‘home’.
Which makes me wonder:
If ‘regular Tamils’ and their families are returning home to Sri Lanka, who are the people claiming to be refugees?
If Sri Lanka is now safe for ‘regular Tamils’, why is it not safe for the people on the MV Sun Sea?
If law-abiding citizens – Tamils or not – feel that Sri Lanka is safe for them, exactly whom is it NOT ‘safe’ for?
Could it, perhaps, be the people who were part of the Tamil Tiger terrorist network?
This would be in agreement with the warnings we have received that the boat is loaded with Tamil Tiger terrorists… Except that, instead of genuine ‘refugees infiltrated by some terrorists’ – as the boat’s passengers are being presented to us by the mainstream media, the whole boat is, perhaps, filled with people who are ‘refugees’ because they (and their kids) are escaping justice for their terrorist activities?
I don’t know. But, if Sri Lanka is now so safe, pragmatic Tamils (and engineers do tend to be pragmatic) are returning there from Canada because the situation there is now ‘safe for regular Tamils’, I don’t know what other conclusion to reach. At least, not logically….
Which brings me to my second point.
I am an immigrant to Canada. Before I came here, I was a refugee – a genuine refugee – and was granted a political asylum in Austria. So, I do know a little bit about the international laws that govern that whole pesky ‘refugee’ thingy… both in theory and from practical experience.
The thing is – international law has very specific laws governing refugees.
There are several kinds of refugees: coming from a country which is now peaceful (no civil war or conflict), which has not experienced any natural disasters lately, one where the economy has not collapsed, the only kind of refugees the international laws recognize are ‘political refugees’.
There are specific protections for political refugees under international law – for obvious reasons. However, there are also some very strict rules political refugees have to obey in order to earn those legal protections and enjoy the status of ‘political refugee’.
The number one rule – the one every country (other than Canada, to the best of my knowledge) – for ‘political refugees’ is that they MUST request political asylum in the nearest country where it is safe for them to do so.
The reasons for this are simple, yet important: countries in the region are better aware of the details of the internal political situation of the country the potential refugees are coming from. So, the understanding of the nuances of the local picture is much more likely – both because the closest ‘safe’ country’s government is likely keep abreast of the latest political developments in their area of the world and because it is bound to have ‘good assets’ on the ground to verify specific claims.
Plus, if there is a specific area of the world which is, over an extended period of time, seeing more political refugees than other parts, either UN-run or UN-supervised refugee camps can be set up there. I went through one of these: they are not necessarily more ‘comfortable’, but they certainly are much more efficient. They have channels set up to verify people’s identities, check their international criminal records, assess the veracity of their claims as well as the potential danger they are in.
Yes, the advent of the internet has made much of the checking easier, without the need for centralized facilities. But, some of the other ‘stuff’ is still best verified as locally as possible.
Which brings me back to the MV Sun Sea: Canada is not exactly the NEAREST safe country for Tamil refugees to seek shelter in!
Sri Lanka – formerly known as Ceylon – happens to be right next to the subcontinent of India. The same India which has been a strong supporter of the Tamils, sometimes even accused of being too supportive of them.
This ship has had to pass right by the – perhaps – safest, most supportive of the Tamil cause. Then it has had to pass by a whole slew of countries, navigate directly away from the democratic countries of Australia and New Zeland. Then it has had to traverse across the largest body of water on Earth, the Pacific Ocean, intentionally avoiding the US islands there….
…before making it to Canada!
That means that the boat (and the refugee-status seekers on it) have intentionally breeched international laws and bypassed many safe havens – just to get here.
This act, in itself, makes each and every passenger on the MV Sun Sea NOT ELIGIBLE to receive the status of ‘political refugee’, according to international laws. (Yes, I am not a lawyer – but, that is my best understanding of the laws.)
To sum things up: ‘regular Tamils’ are returning from countries like Canada to Sri Lanka, because the conflict is over and it is safe for those Tamils who were not terrorists to return ‘back home’ and begin rebuilding the society. And, the political asylum seekers on the MV Sun Sea have disqualified themselves from being eligible for that status under international law by not seeking asylum in the closest available safe haven to Sri Lanka.
Until these facts are highlighted and Canadians in general are made aware of them, we cannot even engage in any kind of a reasonable, informed debate as to the appropriateness of actions our government ought to take with respect to these asylum seekers….
A look at Sharia as the parallel legal system in Indonesia
August 10, 2010 — xanthippaSharia is the Islamic law based on a very particular interpretation of the Koran and Hadith, developed by Islamic scholars and codified in more or less the current form by about the 1200’s.
Many people suggest that Sharia ought to be introduced into Western countries, to be used as a parallel legal system. The idea is that ‘regular’, State-run and State-regulated courts would be available to Muslims, but, they would also have the option of choosing to have their cases heard by Sharia courts. Once this choice is made, the Sharia rulings would then be legally binding.
Britain, for example, had instituted Sharia courts as a parallel legal system since 2008.
Elena Kegan, soon to be sworn as the 112th justice to the US Supreme Court, also actively promotes this idea. This anti-free-speech activist has been responsible for the inclusion of Sharia in the constitution of several countries, including Pakistan, and appears to think the USA would also benefit from a parallel Sharia legal system. She herself has worked hard to built the institutions of Sharia banking, through which money can be channeled to finance violent jihad.
In my never-humble-opinion, multiple legal systems which divide the population along ethnic, cultural of religious lines are not only immoral, they are highly destructive to the social fabric of a country. The moment there are different laws for different segments of society, perceptions of unfair benefits/inequalities will always exist. These will serve to tribalize a society – and be a tool through which governments can manipulate the populace.
The old ‘divide and conquerer’ thing.
The only way all citizens can truly be equal in the eyes of the law is if there is one set of laws which applies to everyone equally.
This seems so straight forward and logical to me that I have difficulty understanding how some people simply seem unable to grasp these facts – even before we even talk about the implications of replacing civil authority by a specific segment of the population and replacing it with a religious authority.
Which leaves the question: am I over-reacting? Would a society with Sharia as a parallel legal system be better than the one we have now?
Perhaps looking at examples of how its working out in some country where this situation exists might help show us how a religious parallel legal system impacts society.
Malaysia neighbours Indonesia – a country with the world’s largest Muslim population. And, even though only 60% of Malaysia’s 28 million inhabitants are Muslim, Islam permeates its life. Its legal system used to be solely based on the British civil code, until Sharia was introduced as a parallel legal system for Muslims.
This is exactly what proponents of a parallel Sharia system in the West are advocating – so let us look at a few, real-life examples of how this is working out in Malaysia:
The age of consent for girls/women to enter into marriage in Malaysia is 16 years of age. This, however, is at odds with Sharia, which places no minimum age on marriage for females. In order to become Sharia-compliant, this minimum age will now no longer be binding on Muslims, provided the father/guardian approves the marriage.
Sharia permits child prostitution – as long as the clergy gets its cut. This accommodation to Sharia strips each and every female child born to a Muslim family of any legal protection from being forcibly married or forced into child prostitution…
Personally, I do not think this is a positive thing.
Flogging of Muslims for alcohol consumption
In Malaysia, alcohol consumption is not illegal. It is legally sold, and available in places like, say, night clubs, where anyone may legally purchase and drink alcohol. Unless, of course, one is a Muslim.
Because Sharia forbids the consumption of alcohol, any Muslim caught consuming this legal substance will be handed over to Sharia courts for punishment. The linked story documents a case of one Muslim woman who was caned for drinking a beer at a night club.
OK – perhaps alcohol consumption is not as cherished a thing as our core human rights. Granted.
But, that is not the point – the ‘subject’ of the religion-selective-behaviour is less important than the division itself. On a practical level – how does one go about policing a society where what is legal for one citizen will result in the caning of another? You cannot tell what a person’s religious beliefs are by simply looking at them!
Just consider the every-day implications for existing in a society that needs to ascertain each individual citizens’ beliefs at every step of policing….
The next few stories require a little introduction to Sharia for those not already familiar with it.
Officially, there is freedom of religion in Malaysia: this is guaranteed by Article 11 of the Malaysian Constitution.
Thus, a person born to Christian or Hindu or Taoist or Sikh (or one of the many other religions officially practiced there) parents is permitted to practice that faith. To this end, the religion to which a person has been born is officially recorded in their citizenship record and appears in their passport as well as all government-issued documents. Should one choose to convert from the religion to which one was born, there is a mechanism through which one can petition to have one’s religion officially changed.
Now, here is an interesting point to Sharia: if a Muslim is living in a country which does NOT recognize Sharia as any form of a legal system, the Koran directs that the secular laws of the land must be followed. However, if a country recognizes Sharia in any kind of a legal or semi-legal form, all Muslims are bound to
Among other things, Sharia states that a non-Muslim may not be in a position of authority over a Muslim. Therefore, to be Sharia-compliant, a Muslim may not work for a non-Muslim; a Muslim may not accept a binding ruling by a non-Muslim (if a Sharia court is available, effectively making Sharia mandatory for all Muslims where Sharia courts are recognized).
This also means that a Muslim woman may not be married to a non-Muslim man: according to Sharia, a husband is in a position of authority over his wife. Therefore, a non-Muslim man may not be the husband of (and thus in a position of authority over) a Muslim woman. It also means that non-Muslim parents are not permitted to raise a child perceived to be Muslim.
Sharia courts split inter-faith marriages, forcibly remove children
There are numerous cases where, after Sharia was implemented, families had been forcibly split up.
The first well-known case was that of 21-year-long marriage between a Muslim woman and a Hindu man – and with 6 children’s lives to consider – being ruled illegal because the husband did not convert to Islam. The woman was taken away for Islamic ‘re-education’ for an indeterminate period of time: until she re-embraces Islam.
Here is a case where a woman born to Muslim parents married a Hindu man and attempted to officially change her religious status to reflect her conversion to Hinduism. Sharia courts still had jurisdiction over her, imprisoned her until she recants her conversion away from Islam and denied the father custody of their child, placing her with Muslim relatives instead.
Under Sharia, divorce rules strongly favour the husband, both when it comes to marital property and custody of children.
Here is a case of a Hindu couple, wed in a Hindu ceremony and subject to civil law, took a surreal turn. The husband had officially converted to Islam – then, as a Muslim, he sought divorce under Sharia. The wife remained Hindu and while she did not oppose the divorce, she wanted the case heard in civil courts – as was her right.
She lost. As the husband is a Muslim, Sharia takes precedence….
Barring conversion after marriage – could the Muslim women who wished to marry non-Muslim men have prevented the legal problems under Sharia?
Well, that is another problem: because Sharia has supremacy over Muslims, the civil courts do not have the jurisdiction to record the religious conversion of any person who is officially registered as ‘Muslim’. To record a conversion away from Islam, a person must petition the Sharia courts to make the required administrative changes.
Except that…
Sharia does not permit conversion from Islam to another religion!
The penalty for even wanting to convert is severe: from death to caning and imprisonment until one ‘chooses’ to re-embrace Islam.
Here is a case of a Muslim woman who wanted to convert to Christianity.
And then there is the case of Rani:
Rani born to a Muslim mother but since a sixteenth day old baby was adopted and brought up as a Hindu by a Hindu family. Rani practices Hinduism and wants to live and die as a Hindu . But the UMNO Jabatan Agama Islam stormed into her house and her husband Muniandy that very same night was forcibly circumcised. Muniandy was earlier threatened with a six year jail sentence if he did not convert to Islam. Now after thirty years later Rani’s daughter Vijiyaletchumi and Sasikala ( who is now 6 months pregnant ) are now suffering the very same predicament her mother Rani faced some thirty years ago because their identity cards carries a Muslim name although she practices Hinduism and has never practiced Islam.
I wonder if this is what the proponents of introducing Sharia here want our society to be like.
Update: Sorry, but I forgot to include this story of a young woman who was born and raised a Hindu. When she was 7 years old, she spent time in an orphanage run by Muslim workers. While she was in their care, they officially changed her religious status from ‘Hindu’ to ‘Muslim’. An adult now, she hopes to marry a Hindu man and wishes to live as a Hindu, the religion she was raised in. Unfortunately, she is not permitted to marry a non-Muslim, as a Muslim she is under the jurisdiction of Sharia courts, and Sharia courts do not permit her to leave Islam, even if her ‘conversion’ was not her choice and considers herself a Hindu.
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 